4
L. Dong
Fig. 1.1 Key aspects and parameters associated with rock fracture at different scales (Revised from
[2])
Currently, Microseismic/Acoustic Emission (MS/AE) monitoring is an effective
method for geo-stress monitoring in deep mining [1]. According to the fracture
scale of the monitoring, the technology would be defined as AE technology, MS
technology, and seismic monitoring technology (as shown in Fig. 1.1), though the
essence of the three technologies are almost the same [2]. It has been widely used in
the safety monitoring of ground pressure in many deep mines and high-stress mines
[3–6]. For instance, MS monitoring systems have been established in several mines
of Canada, South Africa, and other countries [7, 8]. The MS monitoring system is
an important foundation for deep geo-stress monitoring and disaster control, which
is one of the most vital parts of intelligent mining.
In this paper, a set of studies about MS monitoring would be introduced,
including localization methods of MS/AE sources, source mechanism inversion and
discrimination, and ground motion prediction, and hazard control.
1.2 Localization Methods of MS/AE Sources
Presently, the localization methods for MS sources applied in actual engineering
have 3 main disadvantages: (1) P-wave velocity is premeasured as a fixed value; (2)
Abnormal arrival time cannot be eliminated; (3) The wave path from the source to
the sensor is assumed as a straight line. A set of localization methods were proposed
to solve these problems [9–13], as shown in Fig. 1.2.
1.2.1 Iterative Localization Method Without Pre-Measured
Velocity
As for most MS/AE source localization methods, it is necessary to give a practical
pre-measured wave velocity of the structure. It is well known that the wave velocity
is influenced by the materials, size, surface conditions of the transmission media,
and other factors [14, 15]. The input wave velocity is a fixed value, which is different
from the real wave velocity of the measured object [16]. Because the average wave
L. Dong
Fig. 1.1 Key aspects and parameters associated with rock fracture at different scales (Revised from
[2])
Currently, Microseismic/Acoustic Emission (MS/AE) monitoring is an effective
method for geo-stress monitoring in deep mining [1]. According to the fracture
scale of the monitoring, the technology would be defined as AE technology, MS
technology, and seismic monitoring technology (as shown in Fig. 1.1), though the
essence of the three technologies are almost the same [2]. It has been widely used in
the safety monitoring of ground pressure in many deep mines and high-stress mines
[3–6]. For instance, MS monitoring systems have been established in several mines
of Canada, South Africa, and other countries [7, 8]. The MS monitoring system is
an important foundation for deep geo-stress monitoring and disaster control, which
is one of the most vital parts of intelligent mining.
In this paper, a set of studies about MS monitoring would be introduced,
including localization methods of MS/AE sources, source mechanism inversion and
discrimination, and ground motion prediction, and hazard control.
1.2 Localization Methods of MS/AE Sources
Presently, the localization methods for MS sources applied in actual engineering
have 3 main disadvantages: (1) P-wave velocity is premeasured as a fixed value; (2)
Abnormal arrival time cannot be eliminated; (3) The wave path from the source to
the sensor is assumed as a straight line. A set of localization methods were proposed
to solve these problems [9–13], as shown in Fig. 1.2.
1.2.1 Iterative Localization Method Without Pre-Measured
Velocity
As for most MS/AE source localization methods, it is necessary to give a practical
pre-measured wave velocity of the structure. It is well known that the wave velocity
is influenced by the materials, size, surface conditions of the transmission media,
and other factors [14, 15]. The input wave velocity is a fixed value, which is different
from the real wave velocity of the measured object [16]. Because the average wave